Post navigation

It Takes More Than a Learning Path

Although having a set of prescribed job relevant-only information, instruction and experiences laid out in a path that then enables you and your boss/ peers/ team to down-select from the master list and suggested-sequence, and then re-sequence them in a formal Training Plan to meet your specific knowledge/skill needs and the timing of those needs – given your real-world set of task and output responsibilities is a good thing. It takes more than that.

But first let’s focus on the path itself. What is a Learning Path or as known by other names/labels?

I have been designing performance-based, Enterprise-context, PUSH Target Audience “Learning Paths” since 1982 – using what is now known as my PACT Process for CAD – Curriculum Architecture Design. In 74 projects I have designed over 125 T&D Paths or Learning Paths.

I think of a Learning Path initially as a framework – as initially framing the beginning, middle and end of a T&D Path – my term since the mid-1980s for what has more recently been called a Learning Path – say since the late 1990s.

I use that to initially organize a modular set of curricula to enable the real planning efforts by the learner and their management, and/or peers, teams, etc. into 3 buckets: B-M-E.

That modular set of curricula can include performance tests for performance certification (versus knowledge certification via knowledge tests).

So conceptually now, let me share with you more about my thinking about your initial framing of a Learning Path using the Beginning, Middle and End framework, which you can later reframe into 5 to 10 Phases, or Blocks, or Levels – whatever makes sense later in terms of numbers and labels. My clients over the decades have called them by a variety of names. That’s unimportant to me. To them, it may be a big deal.

To decide what to teach/expose when so that learning occurs when you want it to – as dictated by the real-world context of the learner/Performer is an important task for PUSH Target Audiences, less so for PULL Target Audiences. When you are targeting for ROI that is.

The goal of the Path designers are to create something “as flexible as feasible and as rigid as required.”

Period.

Every situation and context might be slightly unique from others. Let that be reflected in each of the Paths produced within an Enterprise. Be flexible when you can – and be rigid when you must be. Reflect that reality! No more, no less.

And if you are using Master Performers as your Analysis and Design Team members – then they will steer you onto the straight and narrow (or curvy and wide) Path as appropriate to the situation as they know it.

Who else would you ask?

The Beginning of the PathThe Beginning of the Path is the “on-boarding to initial competence” – which gets the learner to whatever level of competence is required. Before they take the wheel or take the floor – so to speak.

The level of competence required upon crossing the line in the path – the first finish line ribbon if you will, differs for every job, say for airline pilots and for department store sales associates. The former needs to pretty much have mastered everything before we can let them take the wheel so to speak – even with backup in the next seat – because of the high risks/rewards. And the latter needs to only have mastered the basics before going solo – with backup there in the form of other sales associates and management – and the much reduced risks/rewards.

So the path is either just the basics – or it is the basics and intermediate and advanced job skills training. The Beginning of the path for some is quick. For others it is long.

As always – it depends.

We use that initial framework – B-M-E – to help us sort the tasks-sets and the enabling knowledge/skills that I have assembled in my prior analysis efforts with a group of Master Performers. I now facilitate that same group or a sub-set of the Master Performers to sort that analysis data into my initial sorting framework of three: Beginning, Middle or End.

To do that we’ve got to “talk about” the path and what would B-M-E mean? When would the typical learner pass from B to M? From M to E? And complete E? Just to provide guidance to ourselves as a Design Team for our initial sorting of Tasks and enabling K/Ss from the Analysis Team’s prior efforts.

The Beginning of the T&D Path would most likely include the highest percentage of Formal Learning components, with the Middle and End of the Path having more Informal Learning.

Social Networks might be used for accomplishing an Event’s Task assignments, getting feedback from Peers before turning in assignments to a local coach or to the manager, etc.

The Middle of the PathThe Middle of the Path is the set of information, instruction and experiences that include more Electives than Highly Recommended, and fewer Mandatory (unless there are annual compliance training requirements to complete).

I’ve found that Design Teams of people from the target job/audience reflect the variance or the lack of variance of the job’s realities from whence they came, and that is a good thing. They will drive a higher level of modularity – so as to let people skip things that may not be relevant to their version of the job but relevant to others holding that same job title.

Job Titles are either broad or narrow buckets in which to group people for compensation purposes.

As always – it depends.

The broader they are in reality, the more modular your Learning Path needs to be. The more modular your Path the more likely the learning might be less efficient where pre-requisites might be sequenced improperly by the learner and their management – unless you bundle those modules “of the modular design” into one Event – to kind-of “force” the proper sequencing of the learning.

Your Path might prescribe sequences in some place – and have a more “open menu” in other places – along the Path.

Learners may not know what they need to know let alone what they don’t know. And in what order to learn things that would be more efficient – and EASIER for them.

When we suggest a sequence of Learning and empower they and their management to plan from there…depending on our situation we may be able to trust that most will do a good job at it.

Or we may conclude that given the realities of that context we have to empower less and disempower more – by bundling modules of content into Events and making those Mandatory or Highly Recommended – and then tracking who has taken what and when.

Sometimes in my Curriculum Architecture Design projects, many of the T&D Path’s Events are built with one Module in an Event, with a few Events that might have dozens and dozens of Modules in their composition.

The End of the PathThe End of the Path would have the most Electives, a few Highly Recommended, and probably no Mandatory training (unless there are annual compliance training requirements to complete).

Given the situationally feasible blend of deployment modes used in the Path, and the entire set of Enterprise Paths, there may be many deployment channels that needed to be put in place or re-engineered and then managed. These could include everything needed to enable Instructor led training to happen, or self-paced “e” learning or book reading to happen, or Coached or structured and unstructured OJT to happen via Social networking within, or within/without, the Enterprise to happen.

As always – it depends.

The Infrastructure Requirements for Supporting Learning Paths are Driven by the Process RequirementsI don’t know about your Enterprise’s model or methods for capturing and presenting it’s Processes, but my model for a function/ department/ team that might have been called T&D in the past and L&D in the current state, and might be called P&D in the future state, looks exactly like this:

My 47 Processes are bundled into 12 Systems and those are in three groupings, Leadership, Core and Support. Leadership and Support Systems and Processes are generally owned outside the department. Owned by others. Core are typically the Systems and Processes that are Unique to the department, that they “own.”

I use this template to assess the systems and processes that a L&D organization has in place to help them look at Risks and Rewards to our Stakeholders if we are too loose with our Process management – and where we need to tighten up. Most of the time that is what is needed, but there are times when some Processes were too tight and themselves needed to be loosened.

As always – it depends.

In 2007 I made these two books – and others – available as free PDFs – as well as paperbacks and Kindle books. Please check the Resource Tab.

It’s Not All About Learning

It's All About Performance Competence - at the Individual level, the Team level, the Process level, the Organization level, the Value Chain level and at the Societal level ... or Worker, Work, Workplace and World.

ISPI’s 2010 Honorary Life Member Award Recipient

In an Enterprise Learning Context

I Prefer the Facilitated Group Process for Speed and Accuracy

performance-based CAD and MCD

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Requests for Training – What & When to Expect and What & When to Suspect

Guy has served 80+ clients including over 45 F500 firms since November 1982.

Recipient of the ISPI - the International Society for Performance Improvement - Honorary Life Member Award - 2010 - for contributions to the Society and to the Technology for Performance Improvement (PI).

Founding member of ASQ’s Influential Voices Initiative - 2010. Served through 2015.

Guy W. Wallace collaborates with his Clients using predictable, visible, proven processes on time and on budget.

Client work won awards for AT&T, General Motors, HP and Siemens Building Technologies.

Guy's 39 years in the performance improvement/ training/ learning business have been focused in 2 key areas:

1- analysis of the organization and its business processes to derive the "Learning Requirements" from the "Performance Requirements" and...

2- design/architecting the configuration of instructional and informational content.

Guy conducts performance improvement projects, Curriculum Architecture Design projects, instructional Design/Development projects, and develops and coaches client staff in his ISD and Performance Improvement methods, processes, and use of his tools and techniques - both formally and informally.

What Learners/ Performers Need

Click Here for Free PowerPoint Show Downloads

Paths-Menus-Guides-Maps for Training and Learning and Knowledge Management

A 1987 On-Boarding Story – Ramping Up a New Product Manager’s Performance Competence – Quickly

When Shortening the Time to Performance Competence is a Critical Business Issue with Worthy ROI. Click on Image for the Post

Measured Results Requires Meaningful Measurements

Click on Image for the Post

12 Process Performance Variables in the EPPI Model

Guy W. Wallace – Consulting Since 1982

Curriculum Architecture Design – Since 1982

Performance Competence Development Paths vs Learning Paths - the difference is in the Analysis.

Recipient of ISPI’s 2010 Honorary Life Member Award

The top ISPI award, was awarded for contributions to both the technology of performance improvement and to the Society - as unanimously approved by two consecutive boards of the Society. Awarded in 2010.

HPT Treasures – for Evidence Based Performance Improvement

Developing L&D Content for Performance Impact

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

If You Could Bring Others Up Closer to the Levels of Your Current State Master Performers – What Would Be the ROI?

The PACT Processes for performance-based T&D, L&D and Knowledge Management

lean-ISD : Effective and Efficient and Focused on the Performance Competence Requirements

There Is Too Much Foo Foo!

Avoid the Foo Foo in Instructional Design and Performance Improvement

You Go Down The Learning Path to Go Up The Learning Curve – to go Up the Performance Competence Curve

Guy has been doing performance-based Training Paths and Planning Guides for clients since 1982. First published on Curriculum Architecture in Training Magazine in September 1984 and on the Analysis methods in NSPI's (now ISPI) PIJ in November 1984.

What Was Innovative in Curriculum or Learning Architectures in 1984 – Would Still Seem To Be Innovative Today – Why?

Celebrating – 30 Year Anniversary of this Publication – September 2014

How to Build a Training Structure That Won’t Keep Burning Down - Training Magazine - September 1984

Celebrating – 30 Year Anniversary of this Publication – November 2014

Using a Group Process to Create Models and Matrices - NSPI Performance & Instruction Journal - November 1984

Performance Development Paths

a.k.a.: Learning Paths focused on Performance Competence

Walk the Talk – of Processes Maturity

Walk the Talk – of Processes Alignment

Walk the Talk – of Processes Centricity

Myth Busting in L&D

Click on Image for the Post

In the Resource Tab…

3 Levers in EPPI – Enterprise Process Performance Improvement

Click Image to Link to the Post

The EPPI View of Processes and their Enablers and Enabling Systems

And the Enabling/ Provisioning Systems and Processes that enable the Enablers. Note that "Awareness/ Knowledge/ Skills" are just 1 of 12 categories of enabling Process Performance variables - when you include the design of the Process itself, first and foremost.

I Offer Over 150 Free Videos On This Site On the Topics of ISD and PI!